Capital Punishment: Forums for Discussion

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, given the length of time since this was last discussed, they will place on the agenda for future meetings of the Law Ministers of the Commonwealth the question of capital punishment.

Baroness Amos: We would welcome a discussion of capital punishment at Commonwealth Law Ministers meetings should the occasion arise. But we do not plan to place this issue on the agenda. My right honourable friends firmly reiterate Her Majesty's Government's opposition to the death penalty and urge states to abolish capital punishment in a range of forums, including at the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva in April this year. It is important, however, to get the message across at the right time and at the right level. Commonwealth Law Ministers meetings consider the development of law in areas where a political consensus already exists across the Commonwealth. This is not yet the case among Commonwealth countries on the issue of capital punishment.

Indonesia

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there is any international monitoring of progress in removing the militants of Laskar Jihad from the Molucca Islands; and whether they consider that Indonesia needs help in implementing its part of the Malino agreements.

Baroness Amos: The British Government have consistently stressed that long-term solutions to regional conflicts in Indonesia can be achieved only through negotiation and consultation. We welcome the Malino agreements in Sulawesi and Maluku and agree on the need for firm action to restrict the activity of all Christian and Muslim extremists, including the Laskar Jihad. Her Majesty's Government are looking at ways of supporting the implementation of the Malino agreements, though this is unlikely to include international monitoring. We continue to follow developments closely, along with EU colleagues and other strategic partners including the Americans, Australians and Japanese. Rebo

Burma

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will continue to press for the release of political prisoners detained in Burma.

Baroness Amos: Yes. The recent release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest and the release of over 250 political prisoners from gaol since January 2001 are very welcome developments. Around 1,500 political prisoners remain in detention. Their release is central to national reconciliation in Burma and we and our EU colleagues continue to press for this.

Police Powers and Procedures

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to review legislation governing police powers and procedures.

Lord Rooker: We are initiating a review of the provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and the codes of practice issued under it. The review will be carried out jointly by the Home Office and the Cabinet Office. PACE and its codes are vital parts of the framework providing the police with powers they need to combat crime. We are determined however that this should be taken as an opportunity to reduce the administrative burdens on the police, and not allow them to be tied in procedural knots which prevent them bringing criminals to justice. We want to ensure that after nearly 20 years PACE is still a useful tool supporting the police and, if changes are needed, we will have no hesitation in making them. Rebo

Organic and Non-fossil Fuels: Duty

The Earl of Mar and Kellie: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the charging of duty on non-fossil fuels is compatible with or counter-productive to the non-fossil fuel obligation and the need arising from their obligation to promote the development and adoption of these alternative fuels.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The non-fossil fuel obligation is concerned with electricity generation rather than road fuels. The European directive on mineral oils duties structures requires organic and non-fossil fuels used as road fuels to be taxed at the same rate as the mineral oil for which they are substituting, unless the member state concerned has secured a derogation from the provisions of the directive. The Government promote the development and use of alternative fuels, including non-fossil fuels, where there are sound environmental reasons for doing so; for example, a new duty rate for biodiesel, set at 20p per litre below the rate of ultra-low sulphur petrol, will be introduced from Royal Assent to the Finance Bill.

Tax System

Lord Russell-Johnston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the self-assessment tax system is functioning adequately.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Yes. The self-assessment tax system is functioning adequately.
	Over the past five years, around 90 per cent of self-assessment tax returns have been received by the due date. Under the previous system only around 50 per cent of the information needed was received by the date the Inland Revenue had to make assessments and the outstanding information had to be pursued through a complex process of estimated assessments, appeals and postponement applications.
	For the tax year 2000–01 (returns due by 31 January 2002) 90.6 per cent were received on time.
	The computer systems used for processing tax returns have proved to be very robust. Over the past 12 months we have averaged 99.63 per cent system availability against a target of 98.5 per cent.
	The Treasury Sub-Committee is currently carrying out an inquiry into self-assessment "to examine the objectives, operation and achievements of Self Assessment". Rebo

Tax System

Lord Russell-Johnston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people in the last year for which statistics are available had to pay fines for late submission of tax returns under the self-assessment system.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The table shows the number of penalties raised by the Inland Revenue from late filing penalties on tax returns and the total of penalties paid in the last full year for which statistics are available. There is no information available about the number of people fined or the number of people who have paid fines.
	
		The Inland Revenue accounts for its receipts in accounts years running from November to October -- £
		
			 Accounts year Penalties raised Penalties paid 
			 2000 1,184,000 32,960,556

Tax System

Lord Russell-Johnston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	By how much the self-assessment system has decreased or increased the cost of the Inland Revenue.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The introduction of self-assessment was a 15-year project involving investment of £839 million for the Inland Revenue which should result in net administrative savings of £500 million by 2007–08.

Tax System

Lord Russell-Johnston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the tax system deals fairly with both rich people and poor people; and whether they have studied the examination of these questions in the Guardian newspaper of 11 April.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Whilst recognising the right of businesses and individuals to manage their tax affairs efficiently, the Government are committed to ensuring a fairer tax system by countering abuses and contrived avoidance schemes. Each Budget since 1997 has included measures to secure the tax base and combat avoidance by blocking tax loopholes, including those used by wealthy individuals. We will continue to stop abuses of the tax system which benefit a small minority at the expense of taxpayers generally.
	The Chancellor of the Exchequer in his 2002 Budget speech reiterated this commitment when he said that, "to ensure fairness for taxpayers and businesses, we must act swiftly to close tax loopholes and be vigilant against tax avoidance". He also announced that the Government are reviewing the complex rules of residence and domicile.
	The Government are aware of recent press interest.

WHOIS Database

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the principle that the WHOIS database of web domain owners should be open to access by the general public; and, if so, what representations they have made, and to whom, with a view to it remaining so.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: We support the principle that the WHOIS database should be publicly accessible subject to the general rules governing data protection and the protection of privacy. We therefore agree with the view that, where a domain name holder is a private individual not acting for commercial purposes, the contact details of a third party could be listed in the public WHOIS database if the domain name holder wishes.
	We have made a number of representations to ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers which co-ordinates the domain name system) on the need for an open WHOIS. For example, in its opinion of 16 November 2000 on new generic top level domains, the ICANN Government Advisory Committee (of which the UK is a member) said:
	"The [Government Advisory Committee] considers that ICANN's agreements with the selected Registry sponsors and operators should include . . . requirements to maintain accurate and up-to-date registration data, including a publicly available WHOIS database".
	see http://www.icann.org/committees/gac/new-tid-opinion-16nov00.htm jenny

Consumer Safety

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 25 March (HL3356), whether they will now consider collating statistics on the number of prosecutions and convictions under the Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1998 annually; and what is the earliest date after 31 March 2003 by which they expect it to be practicable for the Department of Trade and Industry to publish statistics for the five-year period ending on that date.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The department has no plans to collate statistics on safety enforcement more frequently than at present. The department expects to publish the next five-year report by November 2003.

Ricability Report

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they have given to the Ricability report commissioned by Age Concern on the sales practices used by some companies in selling aids and appliances to elderly and disabled people; whether the Office of Fair Trading or the Department of Trade and Industry will meet Age Concern to discuss the report; and what arrangements exist for liaising with the British Healthcare Trades Association on its work to improve ethical behaviour in the industry.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Department of Trade and Industry is considering the Ricability report. A letter has been sent to Age Concern offering a meeting with my honourable friend the Minister for Competition, Consumers and Markets, Melanie Johnson.

School Attendance

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are considering withdrawing benefits from families whose children are out of school because of the failure of the local education authority to provide a school place for attendance.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The Government are considering a number of measures to combat truancy. We are therefore looking at ways of ensuring parents meet their responsibilities in bringing up their children.

Defence Capabilities Initiative

Lord Hardy of Wath: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps are being taken to ensure that the arrangements which are to be made to replace the European Defence Capabilities Initiative are adequately monitored.

Lord Bach: The United Kingdom is working closely with Allies and NATO staffs to develop a capabilities improvements programme to build upon NATO's Defence Capabilities Initiative at the Prague summit in November. We expect the meeting of NATO Foreign Ministers in Reykjavik on 14 to 15 May, and of Defence Ministers in June, to give major impetus to this work.

Army Training: Track Mileage

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What track mileage provision has been agreed between the Army's Land Command and the Defence Logistics Organisation, or HQ Quartermaster General, for this training year and each of the preceding six years for: (a) the FV 430 range of vehicles; (b) the CVR(T) range of vehicles; (c) Warrior armoured Infantry fighting vehicles and variants; (d) Challenger 1 and 2 MBTs and variants; (e) Chieftain armoured engineer variants; and (f) Combat engineer tractor; and
	What track mileage provision has been agreed between the Army Training and Recruiting Agency and the Defence Logistics Organisation, or HQ Quartermaster General, for this training year and each of the preceding six years for: (a) the FV 430 range of vehicles; (b) the CVR(T) range of vehicles; (c) Warrior armoured Infantry fighting vehicles and variants; (d) Challenger 1 and 2 MBTs and variants; (e) Chieftain armoured engineer variants; and (f) Combat engineer tractor; and
	What track mileage provision has been agreed for use at the British Army's BATUS training area in Canada for this training year and each of the preceding six years for: (a) the FV 430 range of vehicles; (b) the CVR(T) range of vehicles; (c) Warrior armoured Infantry fighting vehicles and variants; (d) Challenger 1 and 2 MBTs and variants; (e) Chieftain armoured engineer variants; and (f) Combat engineer tractor.

Lord Bach: The agreed annual track mileage provisions for the FV 430, CVR(T), Warrior, Challenger 1 and 2 MBT and Chieftain vehicle types for Land Command (including BATUS) and ATRA for the periods financial year 2000–01 to financial year 2001–02 and financial year 2002–03 (provisional) are shown in table 1. Table 2 gives the agreed annual provision for the same period for the Combat Engineer Tractor as this is recorded in hours rather than miles. The Land Command and ATRA allocations are not centrally recorded for the period financial year 1997–98 to financial year 1999–2000 so the consolidated annual allocations are shown in tables 3 and 4. Data for earlier years are no longer available.
	
		Table 1
		
			   Annual Track Allocation (Miles) By Year 
			 Area Vehicle Type 2002–03 (provisional) 2001–02 2000–01 
			 LAND (Incl BATUS) FV 430 variants 375,000 522,370 654,000 
			  CVR(T) variants (inc Stormer) 646,813 763,850 1,023,100 
			  Warrior 357,305 437,726 425,659 
			  Challenger 1 Nil Nil 6,214 
			  Challenger 2 (inc CRARRV) 144,786 220,069 18,766 
			  Chieftain variants 21,500 40,500 50,000 
			 ATRA FV 430 variants 40,791 63,701 68,954 
			  CVR(T) variants (inc Stormer) 52,780 62,751 60,287 
			  Warrior 35,281 26,180 26,837 
			  Challenger 1 Nil Nil 5,454 
			  Challenger 2 (inc CRARRV) 34,552 29,571 33,341 
			  Chieftain variants 14,105 11,040 16,525 
		
	
	
		Table 2
		
			   Annual Allocation (Hours) By Year 
			 Area Vehicle Type 2002–03 (provisional) 2001–02 2000–01 
			 LAND (Incl BATUS) Combat Engineer Tractor 7,500 10,500 14,000 
			 ATRA Combat Engineer Tractor 2,568 2,562 1,762 
		
	
	
		Table 3
		
			  Consolidated Annual Track Allocation (Miles) By Year 
			 Vehicle Type 1999–2000 1998–99 1997–98 
			 FV 430 Variants 658,684 658,684 908,238 
			 CVR (1) Variants 1,516,000 1,516,000 2,040,500 
			 Warrior Variants 410,124 410,124 727,038 
			 Challenger 1 Variants 136,087 190,148 262,517 
			 Challenger 2 Variants 139,194 57,790 49,404 
			 Chieftain Variants 47,405 70,167 80,942 
		
	
	
		Table 4
		
			  Consolidated Annual Track Allocation (Hours) By Year 
			 Vehicle Type 1999–2000 1998–99 1997–98 
			 Combat Engineer  Tractor 13,500 13,462 19,264

Armed Forces Pensions: Payment Methods

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What evidence there is of possible fraud in the payment of Armed Forces pensions through the Post Office; and
	Whether they consider that paying Armed Forces pensions by voucher rather than through the Post Office will reduce the risk of fraud.

Lord Bach: The risk of fraud in the use of the payable order book for the payment of Armed Forces pensions arose from the fact that payable orders were exchanged for cash, and each book contained nine months-worth of pension payments. There have been occasions where payable orders continued to be cashed after a pensioner's death or following the theft of a book.
	The payment of pensioners by way of a voucher, or indeed the other alternative method of payment via a bankers automated clearing system transfer, will reduce considerably the scope for such fraud to occur. Unlike the payable order book method of payment, a voucher cannot be exchanged for cash, but has to be paid into a bank account. Each voucher is individually identifiable via an accounting system that can detect the bank account to which a voucher has been paid. As vouchers are forwarded to the pensioner either weekly or monthly, the period during which any potential fraud may take place, should they be lost or stolen, is also reduced. Pensioners may continue to draw cash from Post Offices subject to having an account with certain banks.

Public Guardianship Office

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What additional income is expected by the Public Guardianship Office in 2002–03 and 2003–04 arising from the changes to fees for (a) enduring powers of attorney and (b) receivers.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The additional income arising from changes to enduring power of attorney fees is estimated to be £1.9 million in 2002–03 and £2 million in 2003–04, although it is estimated that up to £0.3 million of the overall income from enduring power of attorney fees may be remitted in each year. The additional income from changes to receivership fees is estimated to be £2.3 million in 2002–03 and £3.1 million in 2003–04, although it is estimated that around £1.5 million of overall receivership income will be remitted through the public subsidy for receivership of last resort cases and remission of other fees.

Public Guardianship Office

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the difference between the work that is undertaken by the Public Guardianship Office in relation to the registration of an enduring power of attorney at a cost of £220 and the application to become a receiver at a cost of £65.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The appliction fee of £65 covers the cost of processing a first application to the Court of Protection, up to the point where a hearing date is set to consider the appointment of a receiver. For clients with net assets below £16,000, it covers work to the point where the applicant is given authority to manage the finances under a short order. The application fee is one of a range of fees payable by private receivership clients where the Public Guardianship Office is involved in the management of their financial affairs. These clients also pay an appointment fee to cover setting up a case management regime with the receiver, and other support and advice services in the first year, including a visit, and an annual administration fee to cover ongoing support.
	The fee of £220 for registering an enduring power of attorney covers the cost of registration, handling any disputes or technical problems and correspondence during or after registration, helping and advising attorneys or their legal representatives, investigating allegations of financial abuse against the donor and cancelling registration on the death of the donor. The registration fee covers this work over the life of the case.

Public Guardianship Office

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the cost to the Public Guardianship Office of registering (a) an uncontested enduring power of attorney and (b) a contested enduring power of attorney.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The cost to the Public Guardianship Office of registering an uncontested power of attorney and associated work, not including the resolution of disputes, is £140. The average cost of dealing with a dispute that arises in an enduring power of attorney case is £1,260. The average cost of registering an enduring power of attorney and associated work, including the Resolution of disputes is £220. These costs include direct costs and overheads, including support service and accommodation costs.

Public Guardianship Office

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the former office of the Public Trust Office/Public Guardianship Office at Stewart House in Kingsway was sold; at what price it was sold; and how the sale proceeds have been used.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Stewart House has not yet been sold, although negotiations with a prospective purchaser are currently underway.

Mental Incapacity

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will introduce a mental incapacity Bill.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government remain committed to reforming this important area of the law. When parliamentary time allows, they will legislate to improve and clarify the decision-making process for those who are unable to make decisions for themselves or who cannot communicate their decisions. In advance of securing parliamentary time, the Government are taking forward a number of initiatives. These include the formation of a consultative forum on mental incapacity. This will help us to develop and implement a shared agenda for improving the lives of people with mental incapacity and their carers.

Magistrates' Court Closures: Avon and Somerset

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether decisions have yet been taken concerning proposed closures of magistrates' courts in Somerset at Frome, Wells and Minehead; if so, how they justify them; and whether estimates have been made of the extra costs that would be imposed on all non-official court users, if all or any of these courts were to be closed.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Decisions on the future of magistrates' courts in Frome, Wells and Minehead are for the Avon and Somerset Magistrates' Courts Committee to determine, in consultation with the local paying authority.
	On 3 April 2002, the Avon and Somerset Magistrates' Courts Committee (MCC) made an initial decision that there might no longer be a business case to preserve the court buildings at these three facilities. However, they have yet to start any consultation or determine the closure of these three courts. The MCC has appointed a multi-agency group to look at the outcome of possible closures in the region and will meet on 10 July 2002 to consider its findings.

Northern Ireland Court Service: Ulster-Scots

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many times, on what occasions and on what topics the Northern Ireland Court Service has sought advice from the Ulster-Scots Agency concerning the implementation of the Belfast agreement of 1998 with reference to parity of esteem and the promotion of Ulster-Scots language, culture and learning.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Northern Ireland Court Service has not, to date, sought advice from the Ulster-Scots Agency concerning the implementation of the Belfast agreement of 1998 with reference to parity of esteem and the promotion of Ulster-Scots language, culture and learning.

Human Rights: State Department Report

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are content with the United States State Department's report on human rights in Britain; and whether they plan to make any representations to the United States Government.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We have discussed the State Department's report on human rights with the United States authorities, in particular the section on Great Britain. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland raised the section on Northern Ireland during a recent visit to Washington. The FCO and the British Embassy in Washington have also spoken to the US embassy in London and the State Department respectively.

French Presidential Election

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union as amended at Nice, they believe M Le Pen's success in the first round of the French presidential election represents a clear risk of a serious breach of the principles set out in Article 6.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The French people have rejected M Le Pen's extremist politics with his comprehensive defeat by President Chirac in the second round of the presidential elections. Article 7(1) of the TEU as amended at Nice refers to ''a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State.'' Application of Article 7(1) is not appropriate in these circumstances.

Russia: Freedom of Expression

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that the fines recently imposed on the Newspaper Novaya Gazetta are contrary to Russia's international obligations to the Council of Europe or to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe; and whether this matter will be discussed as an issue of collective responsibility.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The level of fines imposed on Novaya Gazeta is a matter for the Russian courts. However Russia is obliged as a member of the Council of Europe to abide by Article 10 ("Freedom of Expression") of the European Convention on Human Rights and to respect the OSCE principle of freedom of the press and media. It follows that damages should be proportionate to the offence and should not be used punitively in order to drive a newspaper out of business. We therefore welcome reports that the fines may be reduced following negotiations between the plaintiff, who had sued the newspaper for defamation, and the newspaper's editor.
	Her Majesty's Government continue to monitor closely the situation of the media in Russia. Along with our EU partners we have reminded the Russian authorities of the special importance of the independence and plurality of the media. Her Majesty's Government agree with the conclusion of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) at its April session that Russia needs to be more rigorous in promoting fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression and supports PACE's decision to continue monitoring Russia's implementation of its commitments and obligations as a member of the Council of Europe.

Gibraltar

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a timetable for a referendum in Gibraltar will be incorporated into any agreement between Britain and Spain on the future status of Gibraltar.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: As my right honourable friend the Minister for Europe made clear in another place on 31 January (Official Report, col. 137WH), if we reach agreed proposals with Spain we intend to report them fully to Parliament. We hope that the Government and people of Gibraltar would study the proposals carefully. They would have the opportunity to negotiate a final agreement before it was put to a referendum.

Gibraltar

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who would have control of the naval base at Gibraltar in any agreement with Spain.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My right hounourable friend the Minister for Europe made clear in another place on 16 April that we will retain our full control over the military base (Official Report, col. 451).

Gibraltar

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any agreement with Spain on the future of Gibraltar would mean that the Spanish Government would give up its claim to full sovereignty over Gibraltar.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: I refer my noble friend to the Answer I gave the noble Lord, Lord Brennan, on 24 April (Official Report, col. WA 34).

Livestock Industry

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the debate on the livestock industry on 17 April (HL Deb, cols 944-984), when they propose to debate and act upon the recommendations in the Report of the Better Regulation Task Force, chaired by Lord Haskins.

Lord Whitty: I assume the Question refers to the Better Regulation Task Force on Environmental Regulation and Farmers, published in November 2001, in particular to the recommendations relating to simplification and codification of requirements and to compliance inspections. The government response to the report, issued in February 2001, set out a series of timetabled commitments to action in light of the report's recommendations. We have made significant progress in delivering these commitments, and many have already been implemented in full.
	In particular, we are actively pursuing options for streamlining and integrating the department's relations and contracts with farmers. Initial work is being done on a number of ideas such as the single business identifier and e-enabled whole farm plans. We are also combining previously separate inspections for cattle identification and subsidy purposes into a single visit.

Rural Proofing Targets

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Whitty on 25 April (WA 55), whether the phrase "in most Departments there is more to do" implies that any department has achieved its rural proofing targets; and, if so, which ones.

Lord Whitty: As I made clear in my earlier Answer to which the noble Baroness refers, the Countryside Agency's report on the first year of rural proofing revealed that departments had made varying progress in putting in place the mechanisms required to deliver effective rural proofing of their policies. However, there is no question of targets for rural proofing being finally achieved by any department, since the policy requires that policy developments are reviewed on a continuing basis to ensure that proper account is taken of their impact on people living in rural areas.

Livestock Shows: Biosecurity Rules

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, and if so on what scientific evidence, new biosecurity rules have been imposed on agricultural shows with regard to animal dung; whether they have the effect of forbidding people to touch bulls, sheep, dairy cows, pigs or llamas; and, if so, how these restrictions are proportionate compared with the contact with animals which members of the public have when walking in the countryside.

Lord Whitty: The Government's veterinary advice is that livestock shows pose a small but significant risk of the transmission of foot and mouth or other notifiable diseases. Faeces, saliva, bedding and unused feed of animals with sub-clinical infection pose a risk of the transmission of disease and the shows licence conditions, developed in full consultation with shows organisers, have been prepared to minimise that risk.
	That is why the shows licence conditions require those who tend animals to wear protective clothing and ask shows organisers to take all reasonable steps to stop others from touching animals or things contaminated with animal products. Animals at shows will be in close proximity to the public. Animals in the countryside will pose a lesser risk; they will tend to move away from walkers. Members of the public walking in the countryside will normally avoid walking in animal faeces and if they do inadvertently become contaminated will take steps to remove it.
	The need for biosecurity is keenly appreciated by the majority of show organisers. I am pleased that they are taking a responsible attitude to biosecurity to protect livestock farmers and the wider rural community from another devastating outbreak of animal disease.

Cumbria: Foot and Mouth Disease

The Earl of Caithness: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether Ministers in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs have read Cumbria's Story—Chronicle of a Crisis, published in March by The Cumberland News; and whether they think it is an accurate reflection of what happened.

Lord Whitty: This publication has been read by myself and Ministers. It gives an interesting and emotional account of what was a major crisis for Cumbria. There are lessons to be learned about the outbreak. That is why the Government have set up two inquiries. In particular, the lessons learned Inquiry chaired by Dr Ian Anderson will make recommendations for the way in which the Government should handle any future major animal disease outbreak. This will be in the light of the lessons identified from the handling of the outbreak.

Packaging Waste Recovery

Baroness Billingham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What the United Kingdom's performance was in 2001 against the recovery and recycling targets in the EC Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste.

Lord Whitty: The UK narrowly failed to meet the overall packaging waste recovery target in 2001 but
	met the overall recycling target and the material-specific recycling targets for all materials.
	The recovery and recycling of packaging waste carried out in 2001 is as shown below.
	
		Recovery and Recycling Carried Out in 2001 (UK)
		
			  UK re-processing Exported for Re-processing Re-processing for which no PRN/PERN issued PRN & PERN carried forward to 2002 Tonnes accepted for Recovery & Recycling UK 
			 Paper 1,851,505 179,439 25,895 83,064 2,030,944 
			 Glass 696,578 39,016 17,036 29,273 735,594 
			 Aluminium 25,869 3,161 1 821 29,030 
			 Steel 141,343 136,736 3,051 8,365 278,079 
			 Plastic 203,149 66,813 6,077 10,506 269,962 
			 Wood 573,951  4,985 23,742 573,951 
			 Alt.evidence 30,74130,741 
			 Total recycling 3,523,136 425,165 57,045 155,771 3,948,301 
			 Efw 513,939  913 24,986 513,939 
			 Total 4,037,075 425,165 57,958 180,757 4,462,240 
		
	
	Article 6(1) of the EC Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste 94/62/EC set the following targets:
	Between 50 per cent and 65 per cent recovery
	Between 25 per cent and 45 per cent recycling
	15 per cent recycling of each material.
	The UK performance against the targets is shown below.
	
		UK Performance against 2001 Directive Targets
		
			 Material Target Performance 
			 Paper 15% 53% 
			 Glass 15% 33% 
			 Aluminimum 15% 24% 'metals' 35% 
			 Steel 15% 37% 'metals' 35% 
			 Plastic 15% 16% 
			 Wood 15% 57% 
			 Total Recovery 50%–65% 47.9% 
			 Total Recycling 25%–45% 42% 
		
	
	The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 (as amended) and parallel legislation in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland implement these targets in the UK. The regulations place recovery and recycling obligations on producers to enable the UK to attain the directive recovery and recycling targets. The Scottish Environment Protection Agency and the Environment Agency have reported that one compliance scheme and a number of individually registered businesses failed to meet their tonnage recovery obligations under the packaging regulations—a total shortfall of 263,832 tonnes against a combined total obligation of 823,003 tonnes.

Combined Heat and Power

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the Government's strategy for combined heat and power will be published.

Lord Whitty: I am pleased to announce that my right honourable friend the Minister for the Environment will be launching the Government's draft Strategy for Combined Heat and Power to 2010 for public consultation tomorrow, Wednesday 15 May. The consultation document will be available on the Defra website at www.defra.gov.uk and copies will be made available in the Libraries of the House.
	The closing date for comments on the strategy will be Wednesday 7 August 2002.

London Underground

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will immediately place in the Library of the House the final version of the letters of comfort underwriting 95 per cent of the third party debt for London Underground, drafts of which were placed in the Library on 20 March; and
	Whether they will immediately place in the Library of the House the final version of any letters of comfort, whether or not in respect of third party debt, which have been issued in connection with the share purchase agreements signed on 8 May between London Underground and Tube Lines Ltd and the Metronet consortium.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No comfort letters have yet been issued in respect of the Tube modernisation contracts. As my right honourable friend the Secretary of State's Minute to Parliament on 20 March explained, they will be issued shortly before the Tube modernisation transactions are completed.

London Underground

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much money will be borrowed under the cover of the letters of comfort underwriting 95 per cent of the third party debt for London Underground; for how long a term; and at what rate of interest; and
	How much higher a rate of interest would, in their estimation, be necessary had the letters of comfort underwriting 95 per cent of the third party debt for London Underground not been issued.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The proposed comfort letters clarify the Secretary of State's role in relation to the Greater London Authority and Transport for London. They do not create binding obligations and do not underwrite 95 per cent of the third party debt for London Underground. The amount of finance each of the bidders is expected to raise was stated in the draft comfort letters that were reported to Parliament on 20 March. Shareholders themselves are expected to provide some £500 million of this total.
	The proposed comfort letters were discussed and agreed with bidders as part of the wider negotiations on the Tube modernisation plans. It is not possible to estimate the effect one single element of these negotiations, such as the comfort letters, might have on the rate of interest paid on third party debt; nor is it possible at this stage to state the detailed terms of the third party finance being raised for the Tube modernisation plans. These will be finalised as part of the process to financial close on the transactions.

London Underground

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 8 May (WA 184), why they stated that they had placed in the Library of House a copy of an updated Ernst & Young "value for money" review of the public/private partnership proposals for London Underground, when the Library had still not received this document by 4 pm on Thursday 9 May.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: A copy of the updated Ernst & Young value for money review of the London Underground PPP was delivered to the Library of the House on 8 May. At the request of the Library, a further copy of the document was sent to the Library by facsimile on 9 May. I understand that the noble Lord now has a copy of it. jenny

London Underground

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In relation to the share purchase agreements signed on 8 May between London Underground and Tube Lines Ltd and the Metronet consortium, what is the difference between "commercial closure" of the agreements and "financial closure" which has not yet taken place.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Commercial closure on the Tube modernisation contracts was reached on 8 May 2002. It marked the point at which London Underground Limited signed agreed contract terms with the bidders. They have signed on the basis that a number of "conditions precedent" must be fulfilled before the agreed contracts can come into effect. The conditions precedent relate to issues such as the financing of the modernisation contracts and regulatory consents, including acceptance of the safety case. Financial close will not take place until these conditions precedent have been fulfilled.

London Underground

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In relation to the share purchase agreements signed on 8 May between London Underground and Tube Lines Ltd and the Metronet consortium, what would be the cancellation costs to the taxpayer if it does not ultimately prove possible to secure "financial closure" of these agreements.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: In the event of financial close not being reached because of the bidder's failure to maintain a value for money bid, no compensation is payable.
	However, London Underground has agreed to compensate bidders if the competition should be terminated for reasons other than bidders failing to maintain value for money bids. On the two deep Tube competitions, the preferred bidder would receive up to £12 million in respect of the period up to 7 February 2002, with up to £7 million available for the reserve bidder. On the sub-surface line competition, where three bidders were short-listed, they will receive up to £7 million each for costs incurred during this period. In such circumstances, London Underground has also agreed to compensate bidders for 90 per cent of eligible costs incurred after 7 February 2002.

Medical Toxicology Unit

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 7 March (WA 37), whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of each of the annual returns made by the Medical Toxicology Unit under the Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital Trust's conflict of interest policy since the date of the first of such returns, together with a copy of the trust's guidelines on partnership arrangements for the financial years 1999–2001.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: There are no specific annual returns made by the Medical Toxicology Unit under the Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital Trust's conflict of interest policy. However the Medical Toxicology Unit has completed a register of interests in accordance with trust policy. The trust has recently updated the register and the only disclosures relate to educational commitments.
	The trust does not have any specific partnership arrangement guidelines. All financial transactions are carried out in accordance with standing financial instructions. The relevant officer within delegated authority limits would sign commercial contracts on behalf of the trust, not an individual. Specific queries regarding these arrangements should be addressed to Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital NHS Trust.

NHS Hearing Aids

Baroness Howe of Idlicote: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people with a hearing loss have a National Health Service-supplied analogue hearing aid.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The information requested is not available centrally. The Department of Health is working in partnership with the Royal National Institute for Deaf People to modernise hearing aid services. The modernisation project includes the provision of leading-edge digital hearing aids as part of a service designed around the needs of people with hearing impairment. Over £30 million has been made available to support the modernisation project. In addition to the existing 20 sites, at least another 30 sites will join the modernisation project this year.

Teenage Pregnancy Strategy

Lord Alton of Liverpool: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to revisit their teenage family planning strategy in the light of research conducted by David Paton of the University of Nottingham Business School from which he concludes that there is no evidence linking greater access to family planning with a reduction in under-age conceptions or abortions

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: International research and more recent statistics contradict the claims made in this paper. A comprehensive review of international research shows that the provision of specialist youth contraceptive services increases the use of contraception without increasing sexual activity.
	Research also shows that the most effective strategy for decreasing teenage conception rates is a multifaceted approach of which access to youth specific contraceptive services is a key factor. Our Teenage Pregnancy Strategy encompasses this approach, including helping young people to resist peer pressure to have early sex, improving sex and relationship education and acces to effective services, and involving parents and the wider community.
	Early signs of the strategy's impact are encouraging with figures for 2000 showing a 6.2 per cent reduction from 1998 in both under-18 and under-16 conception rates.

Department of Health: Written Answers

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been the average time taken by the Department of Health in replying to Questions for Written Answer tabled by Lords in the past two years; and in how many cases it has taken more than six weeks to reply.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The average time taken to answer Written Questions tabled by noble Lords in the past two years is 11.5 days. It is not possible to provide accurate data on those questions not answered within six weeks. jenny

Quality Protects Management Action Plans

Baroness Lockwood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the outcomes of the evaluation of the Quality Protects Management Action Plans submitted to the Department of Health by local authorities.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: All local authorities with social service responsibilities submitted their Quality Protects Management Action Plans (MAPs) to the Department of Health by the end of January. The Social Services Inspectorate has now completed its evaluation of the MAPs and we have considered its findings. The MAPs from all 150 local councils have reached an acceptable standard. Therefore, subject to parliamentary approval of the special grant report, they will receive payment of their allocation of the children's services grant from 2001–02.

Northern Ireland: Linguistic Diversity

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In view of the equal status afforded in the Belfast agreement of 1998 concerning the languages of Irish and Ulster-Scots, what instructions they are giving to all Northern Ireland Office organisations concerning their use.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: As I indicated in my Answer to the noble Lord of 1 May. (Official Report, WA 133), the Belfast agreement affirmed the parties recognition of the ''importance of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity, including in Northern Ireland, the Irish language, Ulster-Scots and the languages of the various ethnic communities, all of which are part of the cultural wealth of the island of Ireland.''
	The Northern Ireland Office fully supports all aspects of the Belfast agreement, and in liaison with Northern Ireland departments will issue guidance on handling linguistic diversity in the near future.

Boundary Commission Paliamentary Constituency Changes: Members Resettlement Grants

Lord Swinfen: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether at any time Members of the House of Commons have received compensation when their constituency ceased to exist or as a result of changes made by the Boundary Commission; and whether they have any proposals to give compensation in future.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Members of the Commons who retire or are not re-elected have been eligible for resettlement grants since 1971. Since 1950, Boundary Commission reviews have either maintained or increased the total number of seats. The reduction in the number of parliamentary seats in Scotland as a result of Secton 86 of the Scotland Act is a new factor. The Government are considering whether additional measures are needed; any proposals will be brought before the House of Commons.

House of Lords Select Committee Reports: Government Responses

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why they aim to respond to reports of House of Commons Select Committees and the House of Lords European Union Committee within two months but only aim to respond to all other House of Lords Select Committee reports within six months.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The time-scales set out in the Question reflect the agreed position between the Government and the House of Lords, as expressed in paragraph 9.35 of the Companion to the Standing Orders.
	In relation to the House of Commons, the majority of committees in that House scrutinise individual departments. This facilitates speedy response since responsibility for the response rests usually with the one department. However, in their response to a Liaison Committee report in another place the Government noted, "The longer and more complex a report and the more it focuses on cross-cutting issues, the greater the need for time to consider and consult." The Government also drew attention to the fact that, "Departments may not be able, in all circumstances, to meet this [two month] deadline, particularly if a report is complex." (Cm 4737, paragraphs 31 and 32). House of Lords committees are not departmentally linked and so are intrinsically more likely to undertake complex inquiries. Accordingly, it makes sense to retain the option of a longer response time.
	The Government attempt to respond to reports of the Eurpean Union Committee more quickly because the scrutiny reserve requires them to be dealt with swiftly.

Northern Ireland: Office of the Oversight Commssioner

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been the total cost of the Office of the Oversight Commissioner of the Police Service of Northern Ireland since it came into existence.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The total cost of the Office of the Oversight Commissioner during the period 1 May 2000 to 30 April 2002 was £1,171,841.97.

Palace of Westminster: Restoration

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What steps are being or will be taken to complete the cleaning and restoration of the exterior of the Palace of Westminster.

Lord Tordoff: The cleaning of the external facades of the Palace of Westminster began in 1981 and was completed in 1993 with the restoration of Victoria Tower. Cleaning and restoration of the stonework in the courtyards of the Palace is in progress and work on Speaker's Court and Royal Court is now finished. The target date for final completion is 2009.